Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Handicapping Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 12-02-2013, 07:16 PM   #16
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
From a developer's standpoint, coding an algorithm to create par times is a LOT easier (and seems much more symmetrical and therefore (?) more reasonable to most people) than gathering winning times by class and distance, cleaning all the dirty data, and generating figures based on real world events rather than algorithms and formulas.

I think anyone who ever questioned Quirin's pars (extrapolated from the average times of a single grade, and possibly a single distance) and started making their own pars understands that quite clearly. Specifically, reality is not as neat and symmetrical as some par charts indicate.

None of which should be construed as a criticism of Dave Schwartz's pars--I have been making my own pars for many years so I am not familiar with the processes he uses to create them.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2013, 09:30 PM   #17
hogoffate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 43
I use Quirin figures along with Dave's pace pars. The 10K par is 100-100 on the Quirin scale and Dave's par times are 46.2 and 110.1 ( times used are only examples). Let's say 15K level par times are 46.1 and 109.4. Would this not make the Quirin par 101-102? I currently use this method but am wondering if I'm missing something. is this too detailed or should I just give the next level up a 102-102 and try to keep a symmetrical relationship among the pars if at all possible?

Thanks for any help
hogoffate is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2013, 09:54 PM   #18
banacek
Registered User
 
banacek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I think there are two different things being discussed here, and there is some confusion. How is the value of a "beaten length" relevant to par times, which are based on the winner? They seem like two different things to me.
I agree, cj. I wasn't talking about calculating pars based on Quirin or anyone else. I am talking about calculating pars based on each class at each distance. Now when you are comparing between tracks, sure something must be done, but not when comparing the same track. If this is being done to make the between track calculations easier, then it is going to mess up the comparisons of differences at the same track. That's going to cause some serious errors-therefore money down the drain.

I don't need to look at a 10000 par or a 15000 par for that. Let's say we have Whoop-de-doo Downs with 2 distances (6f and 1 Mile) and these classes with associated average times over an extended period of time so there is a significant sample size:
M5000 114.0 141.4 27.4
M20000 112.6 140.0 27.4
MSW 111.2 138.2 27.0
5000 112.4 138.6 26.2
20000 110.8 136.8 26.0
STK 110.0 136.0 26.0

Other than to massage the data a bit for any obvious discrepancies, why would I change any of them? Why would I adjust them so that the differences between the 2 distances was exactly the same for each class? I don't get it.
__________________
The ponies run, the girls are young
The odds are there to beat
You win a while, and then it's done
Your little winning streak

Last edited by banacek; 12-02-2013 at 09:55 PM.
banacek is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-02-2013, 11:29 PM   #19
Seabiscuit@AR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 659
banacek

you have found a problem with these pars and you are correct in what you are thinking. The only solution is to make your own pars if you want to have accurate pars
Seabiscuit@AR is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 01:44 AM   #20
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabiscuit@AR
banacek

you have found a problem with these pars and you are correct in what you are thinking. The only solution is to make your own pars if you want to have accurate pars
And the rewards can be generous for those willing to do the work.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 07:50 AM   #21
Robert Goren
Racing Form Detective
 
Robert Goren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lincoln, Ne but my heart is at Santa Anita
Posts: 16,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by traynor
And the rewards can be generous for those willing to do the work.
You are probably not gaining that much. The one big gain is being able to spot a change in the hierarchy of tracks and races classifications more quickly than those who don't make their own pars.
__________________
Some day in the not too distant future, horse players will betting on computer generated races over the net. Race tracks will become casinos and shopping centers. And some crooner will be belting out "there used to be a race track here".
Robert Goren is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 11:56 AM   #22
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Goren
You are probably not gaining that much. The one big gain is being able to spot a change in the hierarchy of tracks and races classifications more quickly than those who don't make their own pars.
I think it is possible to gain a substantial advantage. I also think that one of the major deficiencies of (most) handicapping software applications is that they are comparing apples and oranges in the form of race times and the internal interpretations (by the software) of those times.

Without going into mind-numbing details of a boring topic, one of my best years ever was one in which I discovered "class levels" that seemed discrete, but were not--and the key to all that was an intimate undertanding of pars. That is, specific "class moves" were not moves at all, but no more than shuffling around in the same "grade" that seemed to be "moves." Because the majority (or so it seemed) of the bettors were wagering as if those "class moves" really existed, horses that should have been underlays became overlays, and false favorites were a cinch to toss out.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 12:07 PM   #23
banacek
Registered User
 
banacek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by traynor
I think it is possible to gain a substantial advantage.
I agree..that's why I do it. But I only do 5 tracks, which is enough work. Any other shippers I have to make estimates using the pars. I also estimate the daily variant for horses from other tracks using them. That's one place I am having the difficulty with the numbers. In the past I have tried to adapt the Horsestreet ones to deal with it, but I'm not so comfortable with that either, as I'm almost winging it. Does anyone know if the Cynthia ones work similarly? I've never used them.
__________________
The ponies run, the girls are young
The odds are there to beat
You win a while, and then it's done
Your little winning streak
banacek is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 12:16 PM   #24
Show Me the Wire
Quintessential guru
 
Show Me the Wire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
Quote:
Without going into mind-numbing details of a boring topic, one of my best years ever was one in which I discovered "class levels" that seemed discrete, but were not--and the key to all that was an intimate undertanding of pars.
Pars are not necessary to discover the above. One only needs to understand the condition structure used at the specific track and the type of horse that wins that condition.
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
Show Me the Wire is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 07:50 PM   #25
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire
Pars are not necessary to discover the above. One only needs to understand the condition structure used at the specific track and the type of horse that wins that condition.
It could also be stated that betting on races is not necessary. I am dismayed at the "one only needs to understand" type of comment. I think the more one understands--including therelationships betweens pars, times, class structures, and race conditions, the more likely one is to get ahead of the crowd with their simplisitic notions of what they "need to know" to win.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 08:09 PM   #26
Show Me the Wire
Quintessential guru
 
Show Me the Wire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by traynor
It could also be stated that betting on races is not necessary. I am dismayed at the "one only needs to understand" type of comment. I think the more one understands--including therelationships betweens pars, times, class structures, and race conditions, the more likely one is to get ahead of the crowd with their simplisitic notions of what they "need to know" to win.
What you need to know is why the horse is in the race and that is in the conditions. You need to know the condition structure at the track and if that horse belongs in that condition in relation to the other horses.

Pars are not necessary as you imply, to discover the class moves you claimed seemed discreet, but were not. If you want to use pars that is you perogative, but it is not the sole way, to discover these class moves.
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
Show Me the Wire is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 08:28 PM   #27
traynor
Registered User
 
traynor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire
What you need to know is why the horse is in the race and that is in the conditions. You need to know the condition structure at the track and if that horse belongs in that condition in relation to the other horses.

Pars are not necessary as you imply, to discover the class moves you claimed seemed discreet, but were not. If you want to use pars that is you perogative, but it is not the sole way, to discover these class moves.
Once more, I view with extreme skepticism any comment that presumes to tell me "what I need to know." That is generic, not personal.
traynor is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 08:32 PM   #28
proximity
Registered User
 
proximity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: pen
Posts: 4,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
I think there are two different things being discussed here, and there is some confusion. How is the value of a "beaten length" relevant to par times, which are based on the winner? They seem like two different things to me.

a couple years back i had a lot of data for charles town in access and computed median times and standard deviations for common distances. and at least for this track, as race distances increased, the standard deviations increased. not quite proportionally, but closer to beyer than quirin. ie. 1 1/8 m times typically strayed further from the median than 4 1/2 f times.

note that if you don't have a lot of data this exercise could be flawed by having a lot of races clustering around a certain class level at one distance relative to a wider distribution of class levels at another distance, but in general is good for a track like ct with a big sample of races at only a handful of distances with a relatively wide spread (4 1/2- 1 1/8) and established older claimers competing across all the distances.

for cd or another major track you obviously wouldn't want to compare 4 1/2 f races (2 yo msw) with the longer distances where a wider range of classes are competing.
proximity is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-03-2013, 08:51 PM   #29
Show Me the Wire
Quintessential guru
 
Show Me the Wire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by traynor
Once more, I view with extreme skepticism any comment that presumes to tell me "what I need to know." That is generic, not personal.

I view any comment about something as an absolute with skepticism, same regarding personal.

Obviously, I am not expressing myself correctly. If you want to discover these discrete class moves which are not, it can be done without pars. You need to know the condition structure and the type of horse that fits. Pars are not vital to this undertaking.
__________________
A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined; to which end a uniform and well-digested plan is requisite; and their safety and interest require that they should promote such manufactories as tend to render them independent of others for essential, particularly military, supplies.
George Washington
Show Me the Wire is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 12-04-2013, 05:08 PM   #30
JohnGalt1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,230
I adjust my speed figures through out the year, but rarely and if I have a very good reason.

I've used the Cynthia pars for years.

The owner emailed me that they are for one year after I asked if they included January races of the current year. So the 2013 pars are for races in 2012.

To make it easier for me I convert the 10k final speed at each distance to a number from a universal par chart.

From the 2013 book I gave CD an 85 on turf routes and Keeneland a 90.

As the year went on discovered that Keeneland races were running about equal to CD.

If many CD races of 1:43 is a 81/16 drf number and the Kee races of 1:43 is 82/15 then I will make them equal and not rate the Kee race as 5 lengths slower as I did earlier. Or if I saw a horse from a Keeneland who ran a 1:41 and horse who ran at CD in 1:42 I could've missed a potential good win bet since the turf tracks are about equal.

The DRF speed figure confirmed if I should change a number.

After looking at many races I have now lowered the Keeneland rating to 85, and now the DRF speed figures are more closely matched.
JohnGalt1 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.